Sam Steingold wrote:
> Raymond,
> could you please try this patch and see if it fixes your non-blocking sockets?
> if it does, I will commit the patch and declare another pretest
> (unless someone complains fast).
> thanks.
Hmm. My response appears not to have made it. Anyway, the patch makes
things worse because I can't compile anymore. :-( I get an error that
FIONREAD is not defined in stream.d.
I'll try to look into this a bit more.
Ray

Sam Steingold wrote:
> Raymond,
> could you please try this patch and see if it fixes your non-blocking
> sockets?
> if it does, I will commit the patch and declare another pretest
> (unless someone complains fast).
> thanks.
Sorry for the delay. Took me awhile to get back to this. I was having
problems compiling and thought I had messed something up. But, in fact,
your patch is causing the problem. I can't compile anymore. I get the
error:
/apps/gnu/solaris2.8/gcc-3.3.3/bin/gcc -I/apps/public/solaris2.8/include
-Igllib -g -O2 -W -Wswitch -Wcomment -Wpointer-arith -Wimplicit
-Wreturn-type -Wmissing-declarations -Wno-sign-compare -O2
-fno-schedule-insns -fno-gcse -falign-functions=4 -DUNIX_BINARY_DISTRIB
-DUNICODE -DNO_GETTEXT -I. -c stream.c
In file included from ../src/stream.d:10:
../src/lispbibl.d:9014: warning: volatile register variables don't work
as you might wish
../src/stream.d: In function `listen_handle':
../src/stream.d:4866: error: `FIONREAD' undeclared (first use in this
function)
../src/stream.d:4866: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported
only once
../src/stream.d:4866: error: for each function it appears in.)
This is caused by your changes to unix.d. If I put back the original,
everything compiles ok. As best as I can tell, Solaris 8 doesn't have
FIONREAD.
Ray

Yaroslav Kavenchuk wrote:
> Sam Steingold wrote:
>
>> I don't get it.
>
> maybe this bug in mingw
could you please report it to the mingw maintainers?
you will also need to replicate it by compiling this C program
int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
if (argc < 2) return 0;
_exit(atoi(argv[1]);
}
>> what is the difference between the first the the second commands?
>
> nothing!
>
>> why are you getting 42 in the first one and 0 in the second one?
>
> I do not known.
>

Sam Steingold wrote:
> I don't get it.
maybe this bug in mingw
> what is the difference between the first the the second commands?
nothing!
> why are you getting 42 in the first one and 0 in the second one?
I do not known.
--
WBR, Yaroslav Kavenchuk.

Community

Help

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:

I agree to receive quotes, newsletters and other information from sourceforge.net and its partners regarding IT services and products. I understand that I can withdraw my consent at any time. Please refer to our Privacy Policy or Contact Us for more details